As you are not an American you perhaps do not know that every member of the military, every office holder swears to “Uphold, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America”...
Ah, but that is the beauty of the US Constitution. By it's own processes, 51% CANNOT remove the right to keep and bear arms from the Constitution. It takes two-thirds of BOTH houses of Congress, as well as a majority vote in each of three-quarters of all state legislatures to remove that right. And any attempt to try such a manuever using the "foreign treaty" ploy will only succeed in starting American Revolution II.
“and since we all live in a democracy the majority has a lot of power”
No, we do not. We live in a constitutional republic. That means the 51% can govern ONLY within narrow limits defined by the constitution. Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on whats for dinner. A constitutional republic says the sheep cannot be on the menu no matter what the wolves say,,, AND the sheep gets to back it up with a magnum.
And since you seem to ask a lot of innocent questions, here’s an innocent question for you. Why is a group based in the UK, so interested in working on disarming regular Americans?
Why not start with the palestinians first? Or how about some mass murdering governments? How about a complete ban in Africa? Where is the movement for free speech in England? Where is the pressure on the Saudis to allow non-muslims to visit mecca?
Im quite surprised that the biggest threat to world peace is the privately owned gun of an American. A little odd,, huh?
We are not a democracy we are a constitutional republic. And the Second Amendment stating that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed is part of that Constitution. The military literally CAN NOT come to take my guns away no matter who votes what because that would violate their oath.
They also can not shut down my church, they can not move into my home (except for war time conditions), they can not prevent me from political speech, they can not award a patent of nobility.
In response to comment #32. YES. Why? NOONE, and I mean NOONE has the right to dictate to me how I see fit to defend my home and family.
If a person feels that they have the authority to deny me and my family the right to be secure in our home and to defend our home and lives with firearms, that person better understand that by doing so, they are authorizing me to deny them a certain fundamental right that they have.
Trying to take my guns would be a very, very bad idea.
And Rebecca “bobble head” Peters can piss up a rope. She’s a mental case and a half.
You wrote: “So if “we” the people “or at least 51% of it” deside that guns are a real problem and there for the police/army would be forced to enforce the will of the people. Would you still fire on someone who has “sworn” to defend the values of the US??”
You are not an American, as you say, so you don’t understand the basics of our system. Our government was instituted to ensure the rights that God has given us, not as a voting society to decide what ideas are popular. At any time that the government is no longer activly protecting our god given rights it ceases to be legitimate, and it is our duty to over throw it. (This is laid out in our first founding doucment: The Declaration of Independence).
The Bill of Rights lists the specific god given rights which are to be safeguarded by our government. The right of gun ownership is #2 on the list, right after freedom of speech and religion. The founders already thought about all this.
To legally change our laws to make guns banned you would, at minimum, need to ammend the Constitution. It takes a lot more than a 50% vote. It requires a super-majority of the States to approve the ammendment. It’s not going to happen.
Even if it did many individuals would argue that the Declaration of Independence, and our innate respect for our god given rights, would require us to rebellion and war against any such despotic disarming of the citizens.
So, to answer your question directly: YES! I would oppose someone coming to confiscate my weapons EVEN if he was doing it based on some law passed by 51% of the people withing some political boundary (city, state, Federal). Whether I would move, hide, fight or surrender would be a tactical decision. But my opposition would be total.
Many other Americans feel the same way. We were born here and it’s our country. We enforce the rules, as armed citizens. I realize it is hard for the subjects of other Nations, whose rights are granted by combinations of legislatures, kings, dictators, emirs and Central Committees of the Communist Party, to understand the armed citizenry of the USA, and our view of ‘citizneship’. Which is why I have taken great lengths to do my best to explain it.
You wrote: “So if “we” the people “or at least 51% of it” deside that guns are a real problem and there for the police/army would be forced to enforce the will of the people. Would you still fire on someone who has “sworn” to defend the values of the US??”
You are not an American, as you say, so you don’t understand the basics of our system. Our government was instituted to ensure the rights that God has given us, not as a voting society to decide what ideas are popular. At any time that the government is no longer activly protecting our god given rights it ceases to be legitimate, and it is our duty to over throw it. (This is laid out in our first founding doucment: The Declaration of Independence).
The Bill of Rights lists the specific god given rights which are to be safeguarded by our government. The right of gun ownership is #2 on the list, right after freedom of speech and religion. The founders already thought about all this.
To legally change our laws to make guns banned you would, at minimum, need to ammend the Constitution. It takes a lot more than a 50% vote. It requires a super-majority of the States to approve the ammendment. It’s not going to happen.
Even if it did many individuals would argue that the Declaration of Independence, and our innate respect for our god given rights, would require us to rebellion and war against any such despotic disarming of the citizens.
So, to answer your question directly: YES! I would oppose someone coming to confiscate my weapons EVEN if he was doing it based on some law passed by 51% of the people withing some political boundary (city, state, Federal). Whether I would move, hide, fight or surrender would be a tactical decision. But my opposition would be total.
Many other Americans feel the same way. We were born here and it’s our country. We enforce the rules, as armed citizens. I realize it is hard for the subjects of other Nations, whose rights are granted by combinations of legislatures, kings, dictators, emirs and Central Committees of the Communist Party, to understand the armed citizenry of the USA, and our view of ‘citizneship’. Which is why I have taken great lengths to do my best to explain it.